Manitoba Hansard — 21 April 1983 (Sitting 51B, 32nd Legislature, 2nd Session)

32-2-51b

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

ISSN 0542-5492 Second Session - Thirty-Second legislature of .... Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS 31-32 Elizabeth II Published under the authority of The Honourable D. James Walding S,,. aker VOL. XXXI No. 518 -8:00 p.m., THURSDAY, 21 APRIL, 19 83. Prrnled by the Office of the Oueens Prrnter. Province ot MllllltOba

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Second Legislature Members, Constituencies and Political Affiliation Name ADAM, Hon. A.R. (Pete) ANST ETT, Andy ASHTON, Steve BANMAN, Robert (Bob) BLAKE, David R. (Dave) BROWN, Arnold BUCKLASCHUK, John M. CARROLL, Q.C., Henry N. CORRIN, Brian COWAN, Hon. Jay DESJARDINS, Hon. Laurent DODICK, Doreen DOERN, Russell DOLIN, Mary Beth DOWNEY, James E. DRIEDGER, Albert ENNS, Harry EV ANS, Hon. Leonard S. EYLER, Phil FILMON, Gary FOX, Peter GOURLAY, D.M. (Doug) GRAHAM, Harry HAMMOND, Gerrie HARAPIAK, Harry M. HARPER, Elijah HEMPHILL, Hon. Maureen HYDE, Lloyd JOHNSTON, J.

Frank KOSTYRA, Hon. Eugene KOV NATS, Abe LECUYER, Gerard LYON, Q.C., Hon. Sterling MACKLING, Q.C., Hon. Al MALINOWSKI, Donald M. MANNESS, Clayton McKENZIE, J. Wally MERCIER, Q.C., G.W.J. (Gerry) NORDMAN, Rurik (Ric) OLESON, Charlotte ORCHARD, Donald PAWLEY, O.C., Hon. Howard R. PARASIUK, Hon. Wilson PENNER, Q.C., Hon. Roland PHILLIPS, My rna A. PLOHMAN, John RANSOM, A. Brian SANTOS, Conrad SCHROEDER, Hon. Vic SCOTT, Don SHERMAN, L.R. (Bud) SMITH, Hon. Muriel STEEN, Warren STORIE, Jerry T. URUSKI, Hon. Bill USKIW, Hon. Samuel WALDING, Hon. D. James Constituency Ste.

Rose Springfield Th ompson La Verendrye Minnedosa Rhineland Gimli Brandon West Ellice Churchill St. Boniface Riel Elmwood Kildonan Arthur Emerson Lakeside Brandon East River East Tuxedo Concordia Swan River Virden Kirkfield Park The Pas Rupertsland Logan Portage la Prairie Sturgeon Creek Seven Oaks Niakwa Radisson Charleswood St. James St. Johns Morris Roblin-Russell St. Norbert Assiniboia Gladstone Pembina Selkirk Transcona Fort Rouge Wolseley Dauphin Turtle Mountain Burrows Ross mere lnkster Fort Garry Osborne River Heights Flin Flon Interlake Lac du BonnAt St.

Vital Party NOP NOP NOP PC PC PC NOP IND NOP NOP NOP NOP NOP NOP PC PC PC NOP NOP PC NOP PC PC PC NOP NOP NOP PC PC NOP PC NOP PC NOP NOP PC PC PC PC PC PC NOP NOP NOP NOP NOP PC NOP NOP NOP PC NOP PC NOP NOP NOP NOP

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Thursday, 21 April, 1983. Time - 8:00 p.m. CONCURRENT COMMITTE ES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY - HIGHWAYS AND TRANSPO RTATION MR. CHAIRMAN, C. Santos: Comm ittee, please come to order. At this point in time, the Chair wants to invite the admin ist rative staff and sup por t staff of the Department of Highways to take their respective places. As is customary with this

section of the Comm ittee of Supply, we shall be postponing the Minister's Salary, which is 1.(

a) as the last item in the budget items. So we will start our consi deration of the bud getary Estima tes with Item 1.( b)(1) - the Member for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, in past years, the Minister has had - to avoid going through and asking SMY s in every salary category, the Minister has had a sheet printed up showing the changes year over year on SMY s. He may not have it with us tonight, but I think we could speed things up if the Minister had such a sheet and we could just peruse it. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister. HON. S. USKIW: Mr.

Chairman, I don't know if we have - do we have enough copies? Yes, all right, that's fine. Mr. Chairman, I would point out that if members want to peruse the document that was just tabled, they will note that there are su bstantive staff reductions noted, and that's to reflect reductions in programs. I believe they are broken down there on Page 1. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, to the Minister, under Administration on Page 2 of the handout - oh, these are the changes only. HON. S. USKIW: Which shows a net staff reduction of 316.3, yes. MR. D.

ORCHARD: Okay, you know, I was trying to find the sheet from past years that I know we handed out, and this tells us a global picture. Is it possible for the Minister ... HON. S. USKIW: For the total staffing? MR. D. ORCHARD: Yes. HON. S. USKIW: I see. MR. D. ORCHARD: Like the line-by-line in there, if that was possible. We don't need it tonight; we could get it tomorrow, and it tells us line-by-line where the emphasis is and isn't on staff. HON. S. USKIW: Yes, all right, that's fair enough. We can have that for tomorrow. MR. D.

ORCHARD: The Minister, I note, in 1.( b)(1) has got two positions in Transportation of Dangerous Goods, so that I take it the General Administration is up two in total for the Administration, Comput er Services, Transportation Division? HON. S. USKIW: Yes, that is correct. MR. D. ORCH ARD: I would ass ume th at when dangerous goods is specifically mentioned under Administration, that one of those positions has to be Mr. Shafransky? HON. S. USKIW: Yes. MR. D. ORCHARD: And Mr. Shafransky is no longer a Special Assistant for the Minister? HON. S. USKIW: Yes, I want to clarify.

There's the director and there is one clerk position , and Mr. Shafransky was added as a term position later, but this is the area where you would discuss it, if you wish to discuss it. MR. D. ORCHARD: Now, term position - is this a Civil Service position? I guess I'll put it that way. HON. S. USKIW: Well, it's a tem porary position at the moment. The position is; but the employee is not. MR. D. ORCHARD: What is the salary range that Mr. Shafransky is receiving in this new position? HON. S. USKIW: We'll have to get that for the mem ber, Mr. Chairman. We may have it here, but if we don't, we'll get it. MR. D.

ORCHARD: Okay, Mr. Chairman, if they could provide the salary he is at as Legislation Analyst and the previous salary as the Minister's Special Assistant, to see whether he is at the same salary range or at a higher rate now. Now, Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the Minister how long he expects this Mr. Shafransky to be in this tempor ary position? HON. S. USKIW: Well, we are in the process of sett ing up a mechanism for the Transportation of Dangerous Goods, which involves legislation, regulation, interfacing with a lot of the public, and then, of course, the administration of it subsequent ly.

So at this point, it's too difficult to pin down a time frame. Perhaps there may not be one. There may be a need to convert that into a permanent position. I really can't project that at this point in time. MR. D. ORCHARD: Is it fair to assume that the Department of Highways and Transportation is now the 1977

lead department for the Provincial Government in terms of deali ng with the legislative changes to transportation of dange rous goods and relating to co-ordi nating of, say, accident res ponses, spill responses? HON. S. USKIW: No, Mr. Chairman. We are in volved in establis hing the legislative framework and the regulatory framework under which trans portation of dangerous goods can be carried out. The Department of Environment, of course, is going to be introducing their own legislati on with res pect to how to respond to situations that arise. MR. D.

ORCHARD: Am I correct in assuming then that your department is going to develop the legislation and the regulations as it applies to transpor tation on the road systems in Manitoba, on the ferry system if need be, and throughout the air transportati on in the province or will you just have control over road movement? HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, all we are responsible for is trans portation of dangerous goods on hig hways . Air, rail, all other modes will have to be dealt with through another agency.

What we are doing is tying in the Province of Manitoba with a national effort which is to do with roads , and in co-operation with the Government of Canada who piloted the fi rst piece of legislation which we are I believe going to mirror , by and large, as well as the regulations in order to have uni formity across the country. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, is Mr. Janssen part of the Adminis tration category here that we'r e discussi ng? HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Janssen is unde r a different section, Mr. Chairman. MR. D. ORCHARD: You'll let us know when that

section comes up then, I trust. HON. S. USKIW: Yes, that's fine. MR. D. ORCHARD: Last year, the Mi nis ter was discus sing some new directions in the department. I noticed an Orde r-in-Council was - no, not an Order in -Council - I guess it was a press release put out by the Minister where he hired a chap by the name of Daniel Hig hway to co-ordinate, I assume, Native hiring in the depar tment. Is this where we discuss Mr . Hi ghway? HON. S. USKIW: Yes. MR. D. ORCHARD: How has Mr. Hig hway been worki ng out? HON. S. USKIW: Mr.

Chairman, he has not been with us for very long. lt is now a matter of about six months. What he's doi ng is working within the department to develop a system with the various branches of the department. He has yet to in terface with the construction industr y, and we're still in the process of putting that together. So in terms of program delivery, 1 don't believe anything significant has happened yet. it's still in the planning process. MR. D.

ORCHARD: Now, is it the Mi nister's in tention and, hence, the government's intention to have quota hiring of Native people within the department and have contractors who unde rtake work for the department to have a certain perce ntage of Native empl oyees ? HON. S. USKIW: No, Mr. Chairman. The in tent is to develop a system within the department where positions would be identified as positions that might be logical to be allocated for affirmative action employment, but there are no particular numbers in mind from an artificial poi nt of view, if you like. lt's not a numbers game.

There will also be an outreach effort in order to make sure that the people that are brought In, of course, are most suitable and have the best opportunity for success in those posi tions . MR. D. ORCHARD: The department, in my recollection, always did retain a lot of Native staff in the remote airport maintenance, operations, Marine Division as well. Is there a particular emphasis in Nor thern Manitoba that the Minister is anticipating with Mr. Hig hway liaisi ng � in employment in Nor thern Manitob a, or is this a � provi ncial-wide effort? HON. S.

USKIW: No, the philo sophy here is to make it happen across the le ngth and breadth of the province. Native communities exist in all parts of Manitoba. I kno w that, historically , ther e has been quite a preoccupation about special programs under Northern Affairs that seemed to imply Native programming, but basically we have to recognize that we have potential for Native employment everywhere, in every district of Manitoba. MR. D. ORCHARD: Will it be moral persuasion with the private sector who are undertaking contractual wor!< with the Provincial Government, or are you anticipating any formalized requirement?

HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, that's an area that we have not yet refi ned and it is something that we will be discu ssing with the indu str y. My hope is that we have a co-operative effo rt to make this happen. We will be sitting down with the construction as soc iation and various in dustry people in order to determine how best it might happen from a positive point of view. Imposition, in my opinion, is not always the most productive way of deali ng with these questions. lt's my opinion that it is better to eo- opt so ciety as a whole into that process. MR. D.

ORCHARD: Have discussions taken place with the ind ustry to date? HON. S. USKIW: They have taken place, that is, between mys elf and the industry. I have not yet involved - and I'm not certain, perhaps the department might advise me whether Mr. Highway has been directly in volved with them at this stage. I am told that he hasn't. Of interest, of course, is the most appropriate name that we have of the per son, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Hig hway Is worki ng in the Dep artment of High ways. 1978

Thursday, 21 April, 19 83 The Honourable Mem ber for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Thank you. Does John MacDonald work in this, or is he paid out of the Administration line? HON. S. USKIW: Yes. MR. D. ORCHARD: What duties is he unde rtaking right now for the . . . ? HON. S. USKIW: He has been acting as a person that has been liaising with the industry across Manitoba on my behalf and reports directly to myself. MR. D. ORCHARD: What is it that the liaison involves? What sort of information are you hoping that Mr. MacDonald would gather for you from the industry? HON. S.

USKIW: The major area, of course, is a policy review in every area of the department. In order to do a policy review, it seems prudent to have as much information and data from the people with whom we must work, private and public, in order that we put whatever issues there squarely on the table in assessing what we are doing and how we might be able to do those things better. That's essentially what it is. It's a public relations effort on one part, and the other half is to solicit from the people changes that they think that we should be making, if any.

So it's a matter of trying to unde rstand the private sector as it interfaces with the Department of Highways. It has to do, Mr. Chairman, with a whole host of areas; the tendering process, the permit process, employment criteria on contracts. There is a whole range of things, local employment, many issues that have come up. It is my hope that we are going to have a num ber of policy workshops that will analyze where we are, where we have been, where we want to go, based on all of the information that's collected . MR. D. ORCHARD: Is Mr.

MacDonald soliciting any opinion from private sector as to the abilities of staff in the field as to how well the people of Manitoba view they are doing their job? HON. S. USKIW: I think the exercise that he is involved in is simply keeping an open ear to those that want to express some viewpoints, whatever they may be. It's almost like an MLA hearing his constituents. In this case, the constituents are the people that deal with the department, and we would like the most frank opinions so that we can assess our own performance as the outside world sees us.

Therefore, the dialogue that is undertaken is not restricted whatever. The names of the people that Mr. MacDonald is interfacing with when he reports to me are confidential. That is, I don't get the information as to who made the comments. I have the comments but I don't know where they come from. That's essentially the process. MR. D. ORCHARD: So it is conceivable that you might find some dissatisfaction with - pick a category - an employee, a district engineer, and Mr. MacDonald might perchance be hearing those complaints and relating them to you? HON. S.

USKIW: I think it's inevitable that when you unde rtake this kind of a process, that you're bound to run into people that have been unhappy over one thing or another. I don't believe any organization can function without having that kind of difficulty or that kind of impression from time to time. That's the nature of the beast and we have to recog nize it for what it is. You know, perfect ion is desirable, but I'm not sure that it's always achievable. MR. CHAIRMAN: Is the Mem ber for Pembina through with his line of questioning, because the Member for Lakeside has been waiting? The Member for Pembina. MR. D.

ORCHARD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Would the Minister conceive of a situation where staff demotion or dism issal might come from information gath ered by Mr. MacDonald in his travels? HON. S. USKIW: Not in that way, Mr. Chairman. I would think that if that were to happen, it would happen as a result of an incident that was brought to my attention, a result of which some investigations or enquiries were undertaken, where the evidence was such that we were compelled to do some thing.

I don't think it would be done in a way where the person involved would not have an opportunity to redress that situation, or at least to put their side of the argument forward. It's not a witch hunt approach that we're unde rtaking, Mr. Chairman, if that's what the member wants to know, because that would be most distasteful from my point of view. MR. CHAIRMAN: The floor is clear. The Mem ber for Lakeside. MR. H. ENNS: Mr. Chairman, thank you. I wanted to say a few things at the opening of the Department of Highways Estimates. I'll be in the other comm ittee most of the time, but I can't help but, Mr.

Chairman, through you, express my very sincere regrets, and certainly that of the oppo sition , at what's happen ing to the Department of Highways and Transportation. You know, Mr. Chairman, I wa sn't here when the Minister obviously made some opening statements the other day, but I read about them in the press.

All of us certainly recognize the economic situation within the province and perhaps would have been prepared to accept the position taken by the Minister and this government if, in fact, restraint or lack of dollars was the reason for the position that this Minister and this government has taken with respect to highway, highway construction and maintena nce in the Province of Manitoba; but, Mr. Chairman, that's not really the case. Mr. Chairman, last year this administration increased its overall expenditures by some thing very close to 20 percent, 18 .5, 19 percent.

This year , the Minister of Finance in presenting the Budget to the Legislature not so long ago again indicated that this government is going to be increa sing overall exp enditur es by something in excess of 17 percent. Past experience certainly tells us that will be closer to 20 percent. Mr. Chairman, not only that, but this government has been prepared to deficit financ e in a way tha t's 19 79

ThurMt•r. 21 April, 1983 unprecedented in this province upwards to the tune of half a billion dollars, $500 milli on. This government has - I acknowledge and give them credit for it - had the determination to inc rease taxes, the sales tax. lt introduced new and innovative taxes like the payroll tax. Mr. Chai rman, I think what has to be kept in perspe ctive is that this government is spending more money and Manitobans are paying more taxes, but the Department of Hig hways is being very severely cut back. I only regret, Mr. Chairman, that the current Deputy Minis ter, Mr.

Joe Brako, who has served the department, the people of Manitoba, in a very capable fashion over many years; and I remind members of the comm ittee that his service to the province extends beyond the particular years that he was in Hig hways, within the road building constructi o n, when the Department of Municipal Affairs had a far greater role to play in the maintenance and the support programs for what in those days were municipal roads, predating 1966.

I have nothing but regret that this particular set of Hi ghway's Estimates would appear to be the last that the cur rent Deputy Minis ter is going to guide through the comm ittee; that it has to be the kind of set of Es timates that you place befo re us, Mr. Minister. Mr. Chairman, the reas ons given for the Mini ster , laudable as they so und, that he was prepared to take a back seat in Cabinet and allow his colleagues to convince him that monies ought to be appropriated elsewhere for reaso ns of supporting the overall job creation drive of this gover nment simply don't wash.

The kind of jobs that are available, that are made by the Department of Hig hways with an ener getic highway construction and maintenance program, are highly jo b intensive; and, Mr. Chairman, more important many of these jobs are precisely the kind of seaso nal worke rs, cons truction workers, that need to put in the time with construction jobs so they can get the necessary data and the necessary work dates in place that enables them to colle ct UIC benefits during the seaso nal, you know, winter layoff of highway co nstruction work. So I have a great deal of difficulty, Mr.

Chairman, in accepting the Minister's state ment.

I will, of cour se, acknowledge the fact that I wasn't here to him, and he will correct me soon enough when he has the floor, but certainly the press repo rts - and I'm one who, by the way, always believes in everything that the press reports about politicians and their goings on in the Legislature - but certainly, in reading the main reason for the Min ister, this Mini ster , accepting less than adequate what the Department of Hig hways requires, as I unde rstand, is because he concurred with the overall government decision to contribute his share to the Job Creation Fund. Well, Mr.

Chairman, I think this Minis ter's contributing far, and above and beyond his share; and furthermore, I think it's a wrong department of government to take it from because we were talking about workers in the construction indus try which figure among the hig hest, in terms of une mployment in the overall, whether it's building trades, but certainly in the cons truction period. 1t is seaso nal work. Many of these people that depend on cons truction work need a seas on, the summer, fall period of work so that they can latch into the unemployment insurance benefits again during the period of layoffs.

So I ju st have a gr eat deal of di fficulty in understanding why this Min ister, this seas oned, this veteran Minister, would allow his colleagues to ride over him in this manner. Mr. Chairman, I can appreciate the politics that's implicit in here as I think was quickly picked up and commentated on by our chief critic, Mr. Orchard, the Member for Pembina . We can understand that highway construc tion doesn't really mean a great deal to many of my members op posite, members that make up the majority of the present government, but the Honourable Minis ter is not included in that particular group.

He does travel the road sys tem, the road network of Manitoba, has travelled it for many years as Min ister of Agriculture in the previous admin istratio n; has some unders tanding about the concerns that farmers have as they're facing increased hauling points as more and more rail li nes are being ab ando ned: has some understanding about the massive movement of goods, services, peo ple, and children in rural Manitoba.

You know, you have to understand, you have to come to rural Manitoba and see how we move 100,000 sc hool children around on sc hool buses whose maintenance costs will rise dramatica lly if thos e roads aren 't maintained. You have to have so me understanding, Mr. Minister , of the direct costs it means to a farmer who's running his equipment over un maintained roads that have been allowed to do with less, what that cost means dir ectly to him in terms of main tenanc e to his equipment, to his grain trucks, to his perso nal vehicles, to his half tons.

Now I know that those are the kind of concerns, maybe the political concerns, that the Minister had to take a back seat to because, well you know there were just not too many farmers, too many rural peo ple elected on the NDP side to help make up that majority. So it was more important to fund more day care centres in Winnipeg; more important to fund more programs for the urban area of Winnipeg.

I don't know particularly if we need yet another hockey stadium in Winnipeg, but if that suits the urban cause, then we'll take construction workers off of hig hways and build yet another stadium in the City of Winnipeg or cover the football stadium. But, Mr. Chairman, let me tell the Honourable Min ister and let him take that message back to his caucus, the present administration is making - in the presentation of these Estima tes - one of those kind of funda mental mistakes that the rural peo ple of Man ito ba will remember for a long time and they will surely remember it come the next ele ction.

Because it only takes a year or two for our provincial roads to start showing up very quickly , the lack of attention if they don't get that 150 yards per mile of gravel maintenance. They have been cut back on the normal kind of maintenance that our road system requires, and Indeed, it needs to be beefed up because of the nature and the changing mode of transp ortation, the heavier loads, the heavier traffic, the heavier trucks that are being used. Mr. Chairman, I don't have to tell this Minis ter, everybody in rural Manitoba is constantly aware of the condition of their roads.

They need their roads to pick up their mail in the morning. They need their roads to deliver their goods. Their children drive over the roads every day to schoo l. They need their roads when they need medical attention. I simply can't understand, and 1980

Thursday, 21 April, 1983 I suspect I'm speaking to the wrong Minister, I should be speaking . . . well, certainly the Honourable Minister of Municipal Affairs should have been able to come to some support to this Minister. He understands what I'm talking about, I can't understand a government that would make such a calculated move to lose friends and not to influence people in rural Manitoba. Mr. Chairman, let me just go back to where I started from.

If this government had accepted the position of restraint, if this government was accepting a position that, hey we've got tough times in Manitoba as, indeed, we have right across Canada and we're going to pull in our horns, the dollars weren't there, that's fine. Although, even then I would say that restr aint was misplaced but that isn't the case. This gove rnment is spen ding 17, 18, 19 percent mo re in all other departments. This government is taxing Manitobans with brand new taxes and this government is pulling their maintainers off the roads of rural Manitoba and that is just unbelievable.

I hate to say this, Mr . Chairman, but it is so unfathomable to me that one honestly believes that perhaps there is a conspiracy afoot on the part of this Minister, that he somehow wishes to undermine the confidence, the loyalty, that citizens of Manitoba should have in this gover nment. Because, I tell you, Mr.

Chairman, the conditions of roads is a barometer that rural people read every day, not just every day but two, three, and four times a day as they travel those roads and here we have a situation where, by the Minister's own admission, miles, hundreds, thousands of miles of roads are not going to be looked after. Potholes are going to get bigger. The construction work, the jobs that could be created in that industry are going to be priorized elsewhere. So on both fronts I can't accept and don't understand the Minister's position.

He says that one of the reasons why the Department of Highways is getting less money is because he's contributed his fair share of the increase that he should have to the big Job Creation Fund that this go vern ment wants to un dertake. We ll, Mr. Chairman , the construc tion indus try in Ma nitoba consists of, to a significant portion, the road builders of this province. It's important to keep a balance within that industry; that we keep X num ber of pavement plants going; stone crushing plants going; earth mo ving contractors going. The Minister knows what I'm talking about, you devise your program around that.

You don't lay out a whole program with nothing but concrete one year, so that you drive the other contractors out of business. You try to balance it despite the political pressures that may be on you. You try to keep a healthy road-building construction industry in the province. As I said before, these people require that summ er work in order to esta blish UI C benefits for the seasonal winter layoffs, precisely the kind of things that the Federal Government, this government pays a lot of lip service to.

This government is dreaming up in co-operation with the Federal Government all kinds of schemes to figure out ways that miners can get back to work for a little while and other people can get to work for awhile, so they can be taken off the present UI C roles. At least get them a job long enough so that they can qualify again. The Minister, in presenting the highways program 1981 for the year that we are discussing seems to fly in the face of all that stated reasons; all that common sense in terms of job creation and in terms of the needs in rural Manitoba. Mr. Chairman, I simply wanted to put that on the record.

I cannot understand the government's position in this matter. It's disheartening to read the kind of staff reductions, although there's always room for trimming. But I rem ind honour able mem bers this department, as indeed in all government departments, th ey went thr ough th at horrendous period as the members opposite used to like to remind us of in the Sterling Lyon gover nment, when we fired civil servants left and right, we trimmed the fat down to zero in a callous way. I can tell you , Mr . Chairman, it's a department that I happen to feel very strongly about. There wasn't too much fat in this department.

The kind of reductions that you're talking about are real and they're going to be felt. The Minister, at least, I will acknowledge is honest enough, has been up front and laid it on the table and has told Manitobans they're going to feel it. We're going to feel it in many ways. We're going to feel it in increased costs in operating our vehicles on our roads in rural Manitoba. The tourist industry's going to feel it; students are going to feel it. All this is happening at a time th at this same government is spending 17, 18, 20 percent more money in other departments of gover nment. It just doesn't make sense, Mr.

Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I have only one further specific question to the Minister with respect to administration. With this obvious pulling, demise of the Department of Highways, does the Minister have any specific plans to reduce highway presence in rural Manitoba by cutting back on regional offices? Are there specific regional offices that are currently spread in the various reg ions of the Province of Manitoba? Is it being considered to close down some of them and centralize them in Winnipeg? There are some reports that may be in the winds.

I would ask the Minister to respond to that one specific question that I have. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. HON. S. USKIW: Well, Mr. Chairman, I'm not sure just whether we're in order at this point in time for me to respond in the way that one would have to respond to th at kind of comment. Tha t was, of course, appropriately to be made as an opening statement. I suppose I have to seek your advice on that, Mr. Chairman, whether I'm in a position to respond given the fact that we are beyond that item. MR. H. ENNS: Mr. Chairman, we're dealing with Administration. MR.

CHAIRMAN: We have some degree of flexibility under the item Administration which is broad enough, I suppose the Minister can have his say to, in fairness. HON. S. USKIW: Well, Mr. Chairman, with respect to the last point that the Member for Lakeside raises, that kind of question would probably arise only if there was a fairly massive moving away from supporting the rural road syste m. If there was a major reduction - not a

Thursday, 21 April, 19 83 tem porary reduction - the decision was made more on a permanent basis then, of course, his question would be quite valid. I have to make the assumption that because of our economic times that the reductions in this year reflect a tempor ary position. Certainly there's been no decision made that we would permanently reduce the level of activity with respect to highway construction and maintenance.

There's no doubt, and I regret that the Member for Lakeside wasn't here yesterday when I opened with a statement pointing out that Manitoba indeed has been moving further and further behind over many years with respect to its road program. I did point out that no government, with the exception of a few years out of the last decade and a hall, the last two decades, has really increased highway spending beyond an inflation factor, with the exception of the odd year. The greatest except ion to that was, of course, during the Schreyer period.

Members would like to take comfort from the belief that in '78-79 they had leaped forward in highways construction. They take false comfort on that one, Mr. Chairman, because that was the position that the New Democratic Party took in opposition, without knowing and realizing that the figures that they were looking at were a new set of figures based on a new accounting system, and therefore, did not reflect an increase of hig hways progr amming wh atever .

In fact, the Department of Finance advised me that in that particular year where we had accused the Cons ervative Government of upping the highways program by about 60 percent, it turns out that it was increased about 7 percent year over year, inflation in highway construction running anywhere from 15 to 20 percent because of the massive energy price increases that were then underway. So that in essence, all governments for two decades now have not kept up with the inflation factor, certainly in the last decade year over year.

Therefore, we were building less miles one year as compared to the previous year, were doing less work per dollar spent. The dollars may be growing, but not sufficiently to offset the inflation factor. I know I'm generalizing and you may be able to point to one particular period where maybe there was a little bit of improvement in that regard, but by and large, I believe my assessment of it is fairly accurate.

I have to agree there has never been a - at least I don't think I've picked one up - a year where there has been an actual reduction from the previous year's construction dollars and this is, of course, the first time that that is happening in my memo ry. I don't know if it has ever happened, and it is true that it is going to have very significant impact, because we did indicate yesterda y that there will be need for staff redeployment simply because of the fact that we can't use all the staff we have with a reduced program; yet we are comm itted to keep them because of the renegotiated agreement with MGEA.

We are not allowed to lay anyone off that has had 12 months of continuous service up until October - should be not before October of 1984. So we are locked into our staff complement, which does mean that there may be some uncomfortable and perhaps even painful adjustment for some staff people over the next period of time in order to keep them on the Civil Service payroll, 19 82 but not necessarily in the jobs that they now hold. That may be a task that may be somewhat difficult to implement, but it remains to be seen how that is goiing to be carried out.

There's no doubt, as the Mem ber for Lakeside would know, that our departmentals that we hire on each project to the extent that we reduce projects by one fifth, which is really what we are doing; I'm including now the inflation factor; $10 million of actual reduction from last year's figure plus whatever inflation is valued at, so let's say $20 million. So, therefore, one-fifth of our departmentals that were working last year would not be working this year.

I think that's very simple and straightforward and I don't think that I'm trying to cover that over because in my opening remarks I alluded to it yesterd ay, and just that the Member for Lakeside was not here to hear those remarks. On top of that, of course, we have to admit that in the construction industry , they too will not be able to recall all of their emp loyees because there won't be that much work, based on the amount of money that we are going to put forward this year , and weather, of course, may play another role there. We can't project that at this point in time.

The only escape of all of that, of course, and I pointed that out as well, is with respect to whether or not the Government of Canada is going to provide some dollars for job creation that will include highway construction, and we are waiting patiently for an announcement by the regional Minister, Mr. Axworthy. I believe the Budget night gave indication that regional Ministers will be announcing regional job creation programs. I don't know whether anything has happened today or not, not being in town, but I expect there will be some announcement soon.

Now, if that doesn't contain any road dollars, and this is where the Jobs Fund was set up, with the view of trying to entice other dollars into the fund in order to get more activity, if the Federal Government was to respond to that initiative and put in $10 million or $20 million, or whatever, let's say $5 million into the road program, we would then have to put our end up and therefore we would be back up there; but we don't know what is going to happen and we will just have to wait and see, I suppose.

But if they fail to deal with job creat ion via the construction industry, that is the road construction industry, then there's no doubt that there will be a good number of disappointed people in Manitoba who will not be called back to work for the next several months and who will then not also qualify for UIC benefits if they don't find other employment. I think that's a valid observa tion and I don't want to take issue with the Member for Lakeside for making that observa tion. I think that's quite straig htforward. We hope that doesn't have to happen.

In the meantime, in tough economic time s, I think it's fair to say that governments are in a corner. We are certainly in a corner financially, unless we want to allow the deficit to go beyond any limit and to the extent that we feel in that position some hard decisions are made and they are collective decisions. as the member knows, and they may not always reflect the wishes of each and every Minister, but in the end, they are a collective decision of government that must be carried forward and we have to live with that whether it's right or wrong.

Thursday, 21 April, 1983 MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Portage la Prairie. MR. L. HYDE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to direct a few questions to the Minister if I may and see where he's going to be doing his 198 3-84 road programs. He has been forced to leave out the upgrading of the avenues in Portage la Prairie, and I think that has once again been shelved for the time being. The people of Portage la Prairie are going to be very disturbed, to say the least, when they hear and read of the program being cancelled once again. The Minister knows, Mr.

Chairman, that I have been working with the mayor and council for a num ber of years now to the point where I thought th at we had made considerable grounds and were making headway, and that the program of upgrading our main streets in Portage la Prairie would be going ahead. I know it's been talked about for at least possibly 20 years and it's going to be very disturbing. It is to me and to the people of Portage la Prairie to think that once again we are back to squa re one and I'll have to start talking to the Minister again to try and encourage him to look at it for another year.

I want to say that - and he knows too, Mr. Chairman - the City of Portage la Prairie, the city fathers have set aside the funds to unde rtake their side of the program. The underground su rface drainage program has to be renewed; they are prepared. They have the funds set aside to take that on and now, of course, I guess they'll probably find other places to put those few dollars but, however, it's pretty disturbing.

I don't have to point out to the Minister that Portage la Prairie is the third largest city in the Province of Manitoba and we are the centre of the agricultural producing area of the province, the centre of the food producing area and definitely now the centre of the food processing industry. This, as we can all understand, requires a lot of heavy traffic and the roads system is deteriorating fast in Portage la Prairie, and I can see where we're going to be in deep trouble in the area of road construction in the City of Portage la Prairie if this is put off much longer. The present condition, Mr.

Minister, of the highway is such that I can foresee you and your department having to spend considerable dollars just to maintain it in a standard that is required. Maybe this year, new legislation that you're suggesting will go through, the compulsory seat belt legislation; maybe we will have to have that in order to stay inside the cars. Maybe we'll have to put those seat belts on to ride over the humps and the bumps in that avenue of ours. Mr. Minister, as I said, the people are going to be very disappointed ·now that this has been turned down, once again.

I trust that you will see fit in the course of the next year to make every consideration to bring this to the forefront of your road program. Thank you. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Thompson. MR. S. ASHTON: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to correct the mem ber. Thompson is still the third largest city in Manitoba. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister. HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, I want to tell the Member for Portage that he is somewhat premature with his comments. I don't know where he draws the conclusion that we have made a decision with respect to Portage in the negative.

I have not said that and, therefore, the member is not accurate, at least to this point, in making that assess ment. Now I appreciate that it isn't mentioned in the road program, but I also want to remind the Member for Portage, that the project in Portage la Prairie is the kind of project that might fall logically into the Jobs Fund category and that's where a decision might be made to continue with it now. Certainly, if it isn't made there, there is one other opportunity under these Estimates, and that is under the Pre-Ad Program next fall. So, we have not given up on Portage la Prairie yet.

I believe that their project is desirable, it is needed, it's long overdue. I don't believe there is any argument to be made on the other side of the ledger and we want to get on with it. I still have hope that we might be able to do that, and we have not concluded our discussions with the City of Portage la Prairie in that regard, so I would hope the member would be a little more patient, although, I appreciate that it is not noted in the program and, ther efore, he has all the rights to draw attention. MR. L.

HYDE: I have faith in the Minister now after what he's saying to me and I know that if this program should make headway this year you are going to make a lot of people in Portage la Prairie very happy. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Lakeside. MR. H. ENNS: Mr. Chairman, I was hoping the Minister would have, in his response, ans wered th at one particular point that I was making, and that is, that sim ply the qu es tion of the overall gove rnment expenditures which he is part of, and collected part of in agreeing to, are running at 17 .5 percent as indicated by his Minister of Finance.

It is in that context, as I said before, that the position that the Department of Highways finds itself in is, in my judgrnent, less than satisfactory. If the gove rnment's intention was to run with a lesser deficit, to run with a tighter hand on government expenditures, generally, then the Minister's position would be much more defensible before this comm ittee at this particular time. Mr. Chairman, I don't dispute the basic position that the Minister indicated about highways and highway construction generally having difficulty in keeping up to a certain level.

All I can do is remind him that in '68-69 we were pretty well served and corning along pretty well with the dev elopmen t of our High way Construction Program, generally, through the Province of Manitoba. I'll deal with the North in a little while. By and large, of cour se, and my figur es could be questioned, I wouldn't want to say that they are absolutely accurate, but if my memory serves me right that, in the latter part of the '60s, '68, '69, we were spending somewhere in the nature of 16 percent of the provinces' resources on road construction.

That then steadily fell to some thing like 9 percent during the '70s, even as low as 7, the former Minister of Highways tells me. What we were trying to do from the fall of '77 on was try and recover some of that ground - and I will be the first one to acknowledge that we certainly didn't bring it back up to those earlier levels but we were 1983

Thuredey, 21 April, 1• moving back in that direction. I believe we increased the expenditure, or the percentage of provincial highway expenditures back to 9.5 or 10 percent. The Min ister, with his advisors, will be able to tell me in a hurry whether I am way off base or not, but I am going by memory. Another specific question, Mr. Chairman, there were very fundamental differences in approach with respect to this department, for instance, with respect to our attitude to , and working with, the Northern Agreement.

While the NDP chose to spend most of their money on various basket-weaving courses, we attempted to put some of them into road construction programs. In '77-78 we funda mentally alte red th e No rthern Agre ement to put a far more subs tan tial road component into the Northern Agreement. My question to the Mini ster is, our we back to basket weaving in the North, are we still going to try and build some roads in the North? HON. S. USKIW: Mr.

Chairman, the Mem ber for Lakeside is trying to make a case for the fact that the Highw ays Construction Program is a percentage of Manitoba's expenditures is diminishing; that is true. I would hazard a guess that is true in every province of Canada. I would like to give him some figures on that, and I am going to start with the ones I have, which is '72, '73. As a percentage of the total we were 6.94; and then in '73-74 we dropped to 6. 1 - I am talking construc tion dollars now - and then to 5.6 again in '75; 5.4 in '76; 5.6 in '77; 4.4 in '78-79. That's an interesting year by the way. . . MR. H.

ENNS: Who was Minister that year? HON. S. USKIW: ... '78-'79; 4.4 in '80-81; 4.1 , '81 - 82. So the pattern hasn't changed, regardless of the gov ernme nt, in terms of percentage spent on cons truction, as a percentage of total provincial expenditures. We're now down to 3.5, last year's figures are 3.5. MR. H. ENNS: Well, Mr. Chairman, the Minister is too old a hand not to appreciate what one can do with figures. Mr.

Chairman, I can tell the honourable members opp osi te that the rural constituents can tell the difference between a yellow caterpillar earth moving machine, or a paver, or a asphalt paving machine and they can recognize, when they see those machines on the roads, as distinct from not seeing any of them. What, of course, has happened is that the total revenue of the province has grown substantially in those years. Tha t same year '68-69 the total expenditures of government were some $348 millions of dollars, . . . so it depends on what 4 percent or 4.1 percent represents. HON. S. USKIW: That's right. MR. H.

ENNS: We have not expanded the geography of Mani toba to a corresponding degree. We are still trying to service the same area' we are trying to maintain essentially the same road system with, of course, some additions and improvements from time to time. So that the use o f the figures in that way can be very misleading. Ali i can tell the Honourable Minister, and the Minister knows that deep down In his gut, that what counts In rural Manitoba is to see a few machines on the road and see some Improvement on the roads and see the maintenance being done on the roads.

All th e arguments that we can have in this Chamber aren't going to resolve that issue, it's going to be resolved on the road system throughout rural Manitoba and the Minister hasn't got good news for the rural people of Manitoba, for the tourists of Manitoba and those that need the roads most and travel on them most in Manitoba.

Again, I simply come back to the point that I started with, this is happening at a time that his government is nonetheless spending, expanding the overall growth of government by some 17 percent and , in fact, accepting a 10 percent actual with inflation added on, to clos er to 20 percent cut in actual hi ghway construction. Mr.

Chairman , that's going to be a message that's going to go home to many parts of Manitoba that will not be forgotten and I suppo se, perhaps that I should not be unduly happy about it. it just means that I'm go ing to have take on the responsibility of highways, perhaps, once again, break in a new Deputy Minister of Highways in short order and hope that maybe some of the older fellows have maybe moved on to their reward so I won't have to fight with them again as I have in the past. Maybe I should leave well enough alone when I see a deliberate attempt by this Mi nister to do his government in but, Mr.

Chairman, I really have some compassion for you, you really know not of what I speak and neither does the Minister of Cultural Affairs, least of all the Member for Thompson, he only flies. MR. S. ASHTON: Oh, that's not true. MR. H. ENNS: So, Mr. Chairman, but back home in those other 15, 16 or 18 seats that the Member for Portage comes from, the Member for Pembina comes from, the constituency that I come from, the Member for Birtle-Russ ell, we know what roads mean to Manitobans.

My final comment is, the Minister won't understand why, even though I appreciated the fact that the NDP opposition was off on a tangent in that first year of my administration as Minister of Highways when they credited me with a 50 percent increase in highway construction, I wasn't about to stop them, Mr. Chairman, because after all, I must say my reputation still hasn't suffered from that little bit of assistance that I got from the honourable members opposite. If you chose to do that to a government Minister from time to time you would hardly expect him to create too much of a fuss while that was happening. MR.

D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, the Minister when he started talking about percentages on construc tion my colleague, the ML A for Lakeside, has pointed out that figures can mean a lot of things to different people. I think what's important to point out here is the number of dollars that were spent from those same years, 1972- 73 on, on construction. The provincial expenditure on construction from '72-73 was $38 million approximately. it went up to $42 million in '73-74, and I believe there was an event called an election in that year. In '74-75 1984

Thursday, 21 April, 1983 the provincial expenditure dropped down to $37.333 million. That was the provincial expenditure because at that point in time the Provincial Government was using federal funds to help build highways in Manitoba. The provincial contribution in '75-76 was about $44.5 million, '76-77 $5 1. 3 million. In '77-78 it was down to $47 million, provincial contribution to hig hway construction and that also was an election year and I can't imagine why they didn't boost it up in that particular year as well.

But there was a declining amount of money going into highways as of '77-78 and in '78- 79 the provincial contribution went up to 55.7 and then as federal funds decreased, '79-80 it was over 72 million and that, Sir, was a quantum leap of some $17 million in one year of provincial contribution. The program didn't expand that much but when federal funding was dropping by some $1 0 million over that year we replaced it with provincial dollars and added to the program.

In '80-8 1 th ere was appr oximately $92 million ded icated to highway construction, at that point in time it was 10 0 percent provincial dollars, there was no more federal sharing. If my memory serves me correctly I believe it went up to $96 million the following year and then the last year's budget that the Minister introduced, he indicated a lot of things that were in the budget were ours so I guess we'll take credit for that, it was $1 00 million. This year, Mr.

Chairman, it's down to $89 million hence the case that my colleague has made and I attempted to make on Wednesday where there is a declining effort at the same time that other government expenditur es are going up and, indeed, the user fees are going up in the Department of Highway revenues. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the Minister on the SMY sh eet that he passed out he's indica ting a reduction of 316 SM Ys overall in the department. Of those 31 6 how many of those were filled, say mid summer last year and how many people are we actually talking that will not have jobs?

How many real people are we talking about? HON. S. USKIW: The real people are 86, on Page 1, the 86.37 SYs are the real people. MR. D. ORCHARD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, 86 fewer and now I assume that with the overall reduction of 316 you've actually eliminated some SMY categories throughout the department. HON. S. USKIW: Departmenta ls, yes. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, I don't believe I have any more areas that I want to discuss under (b). HON. S. USKIW: I want to make a comment first. Mr.

Chairman, it's too bad that the Member for Lakeside isn't here because I wanted to respond to that last interject ion of his when he indicated that the opposition was so generous to him in 19 78-79 by suggesting that he had increased his expenditures by some $30 million or so than he really did. I was going to suggest to him that he owes me one and if he wants to pay it back this is the year. MR. CHAIRMAN: 1. (b)(1 )-p ass; 1. (b)(2)-pass; 1. (c)(1). 1985 The Mem ber for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr.

Chairman, I recall two or three years back we approved a fairly significant amount of money in computer services to unde rtake an inventory control system that I was duly promised by all those involved, some of whom I won't mention right now, th at was go ing to save the department some considerable amounts of money. I believe that computer inventory system should be in place now and could the Minister indicate whether it has achieved the kinds of cost saving the government that was anticipated back when we approved some four years ago? HON. S. USKIW: I wonder if the member would repeat that question, Mr.

Chairman, I lost track of it. MR. D. ORCHARD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I think it was four years ago - I'm not sure of the exact year - we approved extra money in the Computer Services Department to develop an inventory control syste m, which was to run a tighter rein on parts inventory in the warehouse store system, the mechanical division, etc. If my memory serves me correctly, I think the projected savings was something like $750,000 when we got it in place. I think that system should be developed now.

I'd just like the Minister to indicate whether the decision was a good one to proceed with that and we're achieving the kind of cost savings? HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, the system has been developed and it's just being implemented now. It has not been in operation as of yet. MR. D. ORCHARD: Does it look like it's on target in terms of the kinds of savings that were projected for the department? HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, I think the way to handle that one is my staff indicates they can have some information ready for us, but not today on that issue. MR. D. ORCHARD: We can pass Salaries.

I just have a couple of questions on Other Expenditur es, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: 1. (c)(1) - pass; 1. (c)(2) - the Member for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, I've done a little calculating on some of the Other Expenditures. Most of the time they're down or at least not increasing very much. In this particular case, they're increasing by some 32 percent. Can the Minister give an indication as to what the increase in Other Expenditur es are? HON. S.

USKIW: Yes, the general rise in operating costs is $3,400; eye examinations for operato rs, visual display terminals, are $500; service contracts and microcomputers $3,200; computer equipment for direct use in engineering and construction $55,800; Transport Board $8,900; transfer of funds for word processing from other appropriations $36,500; paper supplies for Stores accou nting procurement and invent ory management $7,200.

Thursday, 21 April, 19 83 MR. D. ORCHARD: Is it fair to assume that the Computer Services is taking up more of, for instance, word processing from other parts of the department? HON. S. USKIW: Yes. MR. D. ORCHARD: We're on line with Manitoba Data Services on that computer system? HON. S. USKIW: Yes, that's correct, Mr. Chairman. MR. D. ORCHARD: Ha ve their charges to the department increased? HON. S. USKIW: Yes, Mr. Chairman. MR. D. ORCHARD: What percentage of increase was MOS put in and when did the increase come in? HON. S. USKIW: We don't have that information here, Mr. Chairman. We're prepared to provide it.

We don't have it here. MR. D. ORCHARD: The last I recall, Transportation Division had a couple of fairly bold type schemes using computer inventorying of various statistics, etc. Has there been any progress or any move to avail them of the Computer Services Division and computer capacity for data storage, data retrieval? HON. S. USKIW: No, all we have is the establishment of a minicomputer . . . MR. CHAIRMAN: 1. (c)(2)-pass; 1. (d)(1) - the Mem ber for Sturgeon Creek. MR. F. JOHNSTON: Mr.

Chairman, I'd like to ask the Minister a few que stions about something that's concerning the people of Brandon and certainly will be concerning the people of Manitoba. I'm sure the Minister has guessed; it's the PWA application to continue servicing Brandon or their route from Calgary, Brandon and to Toronto. As a matter of fact, that starts in Victoria and goes to Vancouver, Kelowna, Calgary, Brandon and Toronto.

The Minister may or may not be aware, but my colleague sitting beside me here, when that application was approved, we fought very hard with the Department of Transport - I guess the word fight is not the right word - but we convinced the Department of Transport to have their hearings in Brandon. We made a very, very strong case as to having that particular route approved by PWA. The government went to the expense of hiring a lawyer to represent us and research it. Now, as we know, the application ends the end of May, I believe.

I've had correspondence, as I'm sure the Minister has, from the Chamber of Commerce in Bran don, very concerned that the Depart ment of Transport comm issioners have not seen fit to say that this route will continue. They had an approval given to them for two years. This has become so important to Brandon that the figures of PW A, people gett ing on board in Brandon, is about 76 percent capacity. As a matter of fact, my colleague may have some better figures because I believe he was just in Brandon and they were brought up to him. This is something that's serious.

I believe I saw a news release saying that the Minister had made repres entation, but right now in Brandon, PWA cannot take a reservat ion and gu arantee it after the end of May. Now somebody who makes a reservat ion, they say, yes, we're very pleased to accept it, but we can't gu arantee you can fly to Toronto. I think that situation is getting very serious. I would ask the Minister what he is doing about it to get the Transport Commission to give some decisions on this. If they still intend or if they're still in doubt, maybe we should be ma king represen ta tion again to them regard ing this line. HON. S.

USKIW: Well, Mr. Chairman, the member is quite right. There is a fair amount of anxiety about that question on the part of PW A. We have supported them fully and have made representation on their behalf. We've met with them. I'm not aware as of recent days that things have become anymore urgent than they were. We have no hesitation in renewing any effort or simply sitting on the backs of CTC, if you like. That's something we're prepared to do. I don't think we've had a call from them in recent days. Not in the last month, Mr. Chairman. MR. F.

JOHNSTON: I'm not going to dwell on it because I know the Minister knows the seriousness of this as well as I do. He knows the concern of Brandon. I would ask that if the Minister can find out this. Are they are going to say yes or no? We're now a month away and it's get ting serious, and if they're not intending to renew that, I think the Province of Manitoba has to take the fight up again to get it done. HON. S. USKIW: Well, Mr. Chairman, I think that's a fairly fair comment. It's obviously a good observation and a good suggestion. We certainly intend to pursue that. MR. F. JOHNSTON: I just might if I may, Mr.

Chairman, if Mr. Orchard could tell me what the figure was you were given today in Brandon? MR. D. ORCHARD: 77 percent. MR. F. JOHNSTON: 77 percent capacity out of Brandon to Toronto, and that's anybody that would cancel a line, that's doing that, is wrong. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Thompson. MR. S. ASHTON: Yes, Mr. Chairman, that's the end of the line of questioning on this particular subject. I have a related concern in regard to my constituency and, once again, in regard to PWA service.

Over the last year, PWA has cut back a num ber of flights, particularly the Saturday morning flight, although that is apparently being reinstated for the summer period. I know that the Minister's aware of my concerns and my constituents' concerns about this particular matter. I was wondering if he's had any opportunity to meet with PWA and whether there is any indication of any reinstatement of those particular runs or wheth er, in fact, we're likely to see more cutbacks in the future, 1986

Thursday, 21 April, 19 83 because they had indicated, I believe, as recently as six ago months that they might be cutting back further in the numb er of flights to Thompson and other points in the North. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Minister. HON. S. USKIW: Well, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the point that the member raises. We did discuss that with PWA; but their service, although it was there, was not really being used to the extent that it would make them viable, and we had to appreciate the fact that they couldn't continue on that level without greater utilization.

We have decided not to fight them on it because we believe the economics speak for thems elves. MR. S. AHSTON: I believe the drop in passenger volumes to a certain extent has been because of the situation of the economy in the North, and I think the feeling of people in the North is that, obviously, things were beginning to turn around; certainly in the City of Thompson. We would hope, if and when things do turn around and passenger volumes do pick up, that we would have that service reinstated because we can certainly accept the problem they might have in terms of passenger volumes.

They, I think, have to unde rstand that those volumes have decreased because of the particular circumstances of the North over the last three or four years now actually in terms of mineral problems. HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, I think that what has happened there is very much the same as what has happened with respect to all of the airlines.

There have been cutbacks, and very severe cutbacks, on the part of many airlines, if not all of them, and there's no doubt that if the demand for service is there, I would imagine that PWA would be right in there wanting to give the service because, obviously, it would be profitable for them to do so. I don't think we are in a position to insist on service if it's so obvious that they can't sustain the losses. MR. S. ASHTON: Yes, Mr.

Chairman, one other area I think, too, in terms of PWA in recent years where they are having problems is the fact that they are not as competitive as they used to be in their previous form; that being Transair. I remember years back we used to complain about Transair or "trashair" as we used to call it, but one thing they did do was they actively sought out additional passengers. They used to have seat sales, for example, on Friday afternoon; they'd have a certain number of seats available and they'd sell them at half price. At the present time that doesn't exist.

You have to pay $270 for a round-trip fare and the lowest special rate you can get is $17 5 and that requires a two-week in-advance booking period. When you compare that to what they're doing on their east west runs, for example, you can go to Regina now for $69.00.

I think that might be another explanation of why their passenger volumes have dropped, and I realize there isn't much the Minister can do about this but, at least, I'd like to express publicly my own concern about the way they've become uncompetitive and where they've jacked up their air fares in recent years, because I think it's gett ing beyond the reach of many people who would otherwise fly. HON. S. USKIW: Well, Mr.

Chairman, I'm not all that familiar with the airline's business, but I would hazard a guess that to compare a run east-west with one from Winnipeg to Thompson is probably not the proper comparison, or not an analogous situation, in that we only have the one destination point and that's Thompson;

whereas the east-west run, you have probably stops all along the way, Regina-Edmonton or Regina-Calg ary, and so on. So there's an efficiency factor there that may result in lower fares which would not be practical or possible with respect to a straight hop between Winnipeg and Thompson, but that's just an assumption of my own; I am speculating on that. Certainly, we intend to stay in contact with them on those questions, and if there seems to be evidence that there's a need for improved service then we are going to be urging them to provide it. MR. S. ASHTON: Just one final comment, Mr. Chairman.

I certainly do think there is need for improved service. One problem, in addition to those I've already mentioned, is the fact that we're basically the tail end of their run. I experienced this last year, for example, the one time I rememb er, I booked a plane ticket; the plane was three or four hours late; there were three stopovers. In the end, I decided to cancel my ticket and drive instead.

I got back in Thompson two hours later than I would have by plane, thereby saving a considerable amount of money; and I found, to my utter amazement, the reason the plane was delayed the extent it was, was the fact that they were wa shing the plane. Apparently, it had returned from a charter flight and they had to wash it to get it to the capability of flying once again on the Thompson run. That kind of thing shouldn't happen. We are su pposed to be receiving regular service and to be put back because of a charter flight, I think, is absolutely ridiculous.

If they start wondering why their passenger volumes are dropping, apart from the fact that it's very expensive, when you can't guar antee service to the extent where it only takes two hours longer by road at a much lower cost, then I think that should perhaps give them another message as well. So, as my final comment, I'd say to the Minister if there's anything he could do to press for better service as well as better cost to Northern Manitobans, I think it would be greatly appreciated. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, I just want to add a few comments on the PWA Brandon run.

I think the Minister has hit the nail on the head that the east-west traffic is very very competitive now. You can buy a ticket for very very economical travel to Toronto, to Vancouver, to Calgary, from both Air Canada and CP Air.

There's no question in my mind that PWA routing via Brandon into Toronto and then, of course, hooking up with Calgary-Brando n-Toronto, I would venture to say when they're running at 76-78 percent capacity, that they are probably taking some of those seats from the two majors; and it would be my very extreme concern that all the work the department put in, the citizens of Brandon and Chamber of Comme rce and everybody did some two years ago to get that ATC approval of 19 87

Thursday, 21 April, 19 83 the two-year licence, might be all for naught if C.P. and Air Canada might perchance be making their position of woe and whatnot known to the Federal Government and to the agency regulating the air industry; and that we might fall between the stools because Pacific Western coming out of Alberta - I don't know whether it's a particularly popular airline to start with when you get down east - I would really urge the Minister to have the department follow that with a great deal of diligence and urgency because they were largely responsible for head -manning probably the best supp ort to an application that an air carrier has ever had in Canada.

To have that effort maybe jeopard ized because of a current downturn in air traffic would be sad, and I can assure the Minister that anything that we can do on this side of the House to back up any efforts he might want to undertake, we will certainly support any effort that he and the department can put in and we would very much want to see that licence and that service continued in Brandon.

Can the Minister provide, lest he may not have it readily available, but if he could provide a list of the special projects, if any, that the Transportation Division plan to undertake in this next fiscal year, and also the organizations through which Transportation Division will be providing operating grants and the amount of those grants. HON. S. USKIW: Is the member suggesting that a list of those would be sufficient? Yes, we'll have them for him tomorr ow. MR. CHAIRMAN: 1. (b)(1) - The Member for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: That's good, and if there's any question we can just refer back to it tomor row.

In December , the Minister established a regulatory trucking regulation study group, headed by the head of the Transportation Division. If my memory serves me correct, and I don't have the press release in front of me, but I think you had about a four-month time frame, is that right? HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, we're hopeful that by the next Sessi on of the Leg islatur e we will have recommendations for legislation changes. That's the time frame that we're working on. MR. D. ORCHARD: The terms of reference were laid out broad ly by the Min ister when he made th e announcement.

Has there been any change in the terms of reference un der which the commi ttee is now operating vis-a-vis a few months of operation? They've probably come up with some new wrinkles and things that were unexpected. Have the terms of reference changed significantly? HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, the first exercise will be the production of a Green Paper, after which we will then go back to the public, produce a White Paper, after which there will be legislation. That is the strategy that we are employing. At this stage there have been no changes to their terms of reference. MR. D.

ORCHARD: The time frame on that - is the Gr een Paper expected, say, possibly during this Session? HON. S. USKIW: Within about six or eight weeks we should have that first document out, Mr. Chairman. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, will that be a document that all memb ers of the Legislature would avail thems elves to, a public document? HON. S. USKIW: A public document. MR. D. ORCHARD: That's good.

Now, would the purpose of that so-called Green Paper be to form - for the lack of a better word - a target for the participants in the industry to focus on to suggest, yes, you're right here, you're wrong there, and come up with versions of change? HON. S. USKIW: Yes, the paper will represent the findings to that point in time which will then be put forward to the public, and it should serve as a focus point on which to then come up with more definitive recommendations in the subsequent paper. MR. D.

ORCHARD: I almost hesitate to ask the Minister this, but will the Minister be having a travelling Standing Comm ittee of the Legislature on hearings on this Green Paper? HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, the Green Paper will attempt to outline options for the public to consider and to express opinion on. I don't envisage a need for a comm ittee of the Legislature at this point in time. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Mem ber for Gladstone. MRS. C. OLESON: I was just wondering Mr. Chairman, through you to the Minister, if this study on the trucking industry takes into account interprovincial problems.

I raise the point because one particular constituent of mine, who runs a trucking business, has a great many problems that involve interprovincial trucking and how to get around regulations so that he can bring a payload back with him. Of course, it isn't very economical to drive to British Columbia with a load and come back empty.

Also, he has problems concerning compensation - if his drivers have accidents in other provinces and many many complications that causes essentially a small trucking firm, for the manager, to spend a great deal of his time on paperwork where he would really prefer to be managing his trucking business from a point of view of having it viable. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Minister. HON. S. USKIW: Well, first of all, I would have to know the details of his licensing. Is he a PSV operator, is he an independent, or what is he? What kind of a licence does he carry, do you know? MRS. C.

OLESON: He's the Carberry Transfer and he has a contract to haul potato chips cross-country. That's the particular trucker I'm talking about at this time and part of his problem is interprovincial licensing. HON. S. USKIW: I'm advised by the Chairman of the Transport Board that there are meetings under way 19 88

Thursday, 21 April, 1983 next week, or will be unde r way next week, which will hopefully bring about a lessening of the paperwork that is now involved there in the proces sing of one's application and so on. I don't know that I can answer specifically to that particular situation. We'd have to have more research or detail on that. MRS. C.

OLESON: I am just concerned that when this study is on that problems like that are taken into consideration, of trucking firms that have to deal with other provincial regulations and that there could be some way, perhaps in conjunc tion with a federal department, that would make it easier for people to work across the borders. HON. S. USKIW: We recognize that we want to minimize as much red tape as possible and that's part of the effort of the review or the task force.

There's always in a regulated system going to be some necessary paperwork, of course, abiding by regulation, no question about that, unless we abandon reg ulation completely. I don't believe that is going to come out as one of the recommen dations, although one never knows. MR. CHAIRMAN: 1. (b)(1) - the Member for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, I just want to ask the Minister, I found a couple of more items. It might take a little more than 15 minutes if you want to . HON. S. USKIW: Yes. MR. D.

ORCHAR D: Is the Tranporta tion Division working on any abandonment hearings right now, supporting any retention associations? HON. S. USKIW: The Erwood Subdivision is being heard tod ay, Mr. Chairman. We're involved in that one. MR. D. ORCHARD: Erwood goes to where? Is that up in the Interlake or is that on the west side? HON. S. USKIW: It's on the west side. That's Swan River. MR. D. ORCHARD: Oh, yes, Swan River. HON. S. USKIW: Near Swan River, I think. MR. D. ORCHARD: Are there any other associations that the department is providing assistance to? HON. S.

USKIW: Yes, the department supports every local subm ission where we concur in what they are attem pting to do. In this case, I bel ieve we are supporting some local ... We're lending assistance to local people in the area. MR. D. ORCHARD: On which su bdivisions? HON. S. USKIW: That's on Erwood and we have been involved with lnwood and Winnipegosis and we may still further be involved with respect to those two. MR. D. ORCHARD: The Ma cFarlane Cam pers' Association, how are they making out now with their passenger service, Mr. Chairman? HON. S.

USKIW: Well, all I can say is that we are trying to do something there that will result in a service, but we are not satisfied that we're at all making a great deal of progress at this stage. We're not sure. MR. D. ORCHARD: Well, I want to wish the Minister every success. HON. S. USKIW: You don't have a cottage in Ontario, do you? MR. D.

ORCHARD: No, I don't have a cottage in Ontario, but I just maybe I broke ranks on my normal Progressive Conservative - (I nterject ion) - economic type analysis from time to time - who said shame? - in that when it came to passenger service, I recogn ized that with Via Rail there were some substantial losses, but we adamantly opposed the No rthern Transcontinental, a discontuance of that, and we tried to support passenger rail in Northern Manitoba. I am pleased to see that it was out of those hearings on that northern transportation, that the idea came up of the rail bus is going to be tried.

I think that is a quantum leap forward that has obviously taken a couple of years pretty solid effort on behalf of the potential users of that service. Now this MacFarlane camping one, it is in some regards it might be a little difficult to put a lot of emphasis and effort into it because you are dealing not with an economic need for passenger service, but more a recreat ion need. But, boy if they don't have some Via Rail service in there, they are just right out of luck.

I would hope the Minister can persuade the powers that be that this service is indeed a fairly necessary one for those citizens that have the good fortune of a summer cottage there. Another matter that I want to ask the Minister about, the truc king indus try, and I would su spect the Transportation Division has probably done the numbers on it.

The trucking industry made the point when the payroll tax came in that they have drivers that are inter provincial and that they're not earning their entire income within the Province of Manitoba, particularly drivers that go from Winnipeg say to Edmonton as an example where probably 70 percent of the their mileage is outside of the province, hence their income is really earned outside of the province. The Minister has indicated, according to an

article in the Highway News of Novem ber, Decem ber; that the Minister recognizes the problem which I think is a fairly legitimate one, and that amending legislation will be introduced in early 19 83. Is that the case that you're going to be bringing in a method of remedy for the industry? HON. S. USKIW: I have to say that I don't recall anything that would indicate legislative change. Are you talking about the Minister of Highways or the Minister of Finance? MR. D. ORCHARD: Well, okay. Let me read it here. HON. S. USKIW: That's a Department of Finance question. MR. D. ORCHARD: Yes, fine fine fine, you're right.

It indicates that the Minister of Finance, they protested to the Minister of Finance, he recognized the problem. 1989

Thursday, 21 April, 1983 I wonder then, could the Minister, just since the Minister of Finance has passed his Estim ates without me asking him the ques tion, could the Minister undertake to find out if there is going to be some kind of an accommodation because I think it is a pretty legitimate concern that they have. It was identified early on when the payroll tax came in. Could the Minister just provide us with some detail on that? HON. S. USKIW: Well, Mr. Chairman, I think I can endeavour to give whatever information is available. MR. CHAIRMAN: 1. (d)(1) - the Member for Pembina. MR. D.

ORCHARD: I guess we can - I just got a few more questions on rural transportation and then we can pass the whole works. Now the Minister in his opening remarks indicated that - and I'll be chastized again because I am trying to get you to spend more money, Mr. Minister, but I question whether your statement is necessarily correct and you can provide me, of course with your usual good information, sound information.

But, you indicate that we are continuiing with - okay, members will also recall that a few years ago, we introduced, that's not quite right, it wasn't you that introduced it, it was us that introduced it, but I don't want to nitpick. The rural transportation grants to the disabled. HON. S. USKIW: That's what I said. MR. D. ORCHARD: No, but you said that, members will also recall that a few years ago, we introduced. Now if I was sitting back reading, I would take it that you did it. Ok ay, we won't argue about that. HON. S. USKIW: Mr.

Chairman, I believe if the member reads it cor rectly, I did mention that it was done by the previous government. MR. D. ORCHARD: Oh. by God you did. That's unbelievable, I've never made two mistakes so quickly in all my life. I should have known better. Yes, the previous government began this program. Now, we are continuing with that at a level that is meeting the needs of commu nities in Manitoba. There is no increase here, is the Minister sure that obviously the level of grants aren't increasing nor the number of commun ities that have got the service are increasing, but the same amount of money available?

HON. S. USKIW: I believe, Mr. Chairman, what I was trying to say is that we are able to respond to all of the commu nities that have made application or that we can foresee that will be making applications within the budget that we have. In other words there have been no financial restraints given the parameters of our program. MR. D. ORCHARD: How many commun ities are on the program now? Neepawa, Steinbach, The Pas. HON. S. USKIW: Sorry, I think I should mention this. We only spent 70,000 last year and that is all we will spending this year. So, it isn't being taken up as fast as we had anticipated. MR. D.

ORCHARD: How many communities are on the program now, Mr. Chairman? HON. S. USKIW: We have about six commu nities. We anticipate about two more at the present time. If the member wants a list, I think we will have to do that at the next sitting. MR. D. ORCHARD: Now the Minister also went on to say that this year funds from the UTAP Program have also been used. I thought the UTAP Program was finished about a year ago. Is it still ongoing or do you have renewal of that? HON. S. USKIW: There was an additional allocation of 10 0,000 I believe it was. The program was extended for one year for the expenditures. MR. D.

ORCHARD: And what portion of the 17 0,000 does the Minister expect to be drawing down out of the UTAP Program? HON. S. USKIW: We are aware of the need for capital grants for four different groups for locations that will use up the $10 0,000 under the UTAP Program. MR. D. ORCHARD: One final question, I think on this, Mr. Chairman. Has the Minister changed any of the operating criteria with the program to change any part of it? HON. S. US KI W: No , th ere is nothing chan ged excepting that we have a committee looking at co ordinating a number of programs. There is nothing new with respect to this. �llR. D.

ORCHARD: That stimu lated another question, Mr. Chairman. Co-ordinating a number of programs, could the Minister expand on that a little for me? HON. S. l.ISKIW: Yes, all of the handicap programs and things of that nature we are trying to put together under one system or framework. That's still some days ahead. We are going to have some meetings on that. That is all I am indicating. I don't know what is going to be the outcome of that. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Thompson. MR. S. ASHTON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I should perhaps indicate to the Minister that he may soon be getting an application for assistance under this program !rom a group in Thompson. There is an active effort being spearheaded by the local

chapter of MLPH as well as some of the senior citizens groups and I can indicate to you that if their initial prog ress is any indication, they may very well have an application in for a handi-van system for next year because they certainly have been very active, and they are certainly gett ing the community support on that. It is an area which is liable to be of growing need in Thompson since we are finally gett ing to the stage where our population is growing somewhat older and we are ending up with a fair number of people who are growing older and with the disabilities that are incumbent with 19 90

Thursday, 21 April, 1983 ·��- advancing age, so you may find the next year that Thompson will be one of the seven commun ities rather than six. HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the point that is being made by the Mem ber !or Thompson. We are very much aware of that initiative there. We're hoping to get the contract. We certainly will do whatever we must do to make that happen. MR. CH AIRMAN: 1. (d)(1) --p ass; 1. (d)(2)- pass; 1. (d)(3)- pass; 2.(a )(1)- pass? MR. D. ORCHARD: 2.(a )(1), are we going to go on tonight? HON. S. USKIW: No, no, we're still . Comm ittee rise, Mr. Chairman. MR.

CHAIRMAN: Comm ittee rise. SUPPLY - EDUCATION MR. CHAIRMAN, P. Eyler: Comm ittee, come to order. We are considering the Estimates of the Department of Education. Does the Minister have any opening comments? Madam Minister. HON. M. HEMPHILL: Mr. Chairman, it is my pleasure to introduc e the Estima tes of the Depar tment of Education for your consideration. The total Estim ates, including Expenditures Related To Capital Assets, are $618,5 96,900, an increase of 8.7 1 percent.

Before dealing with the activities my department has pursued so ably in the past year, allow me to comment upon external events which have put extraordinary pressure on provincial revenues. I refer, of course, to the significant downturn in the economy which has forced so many Canadians, including Manitobans, to go without jobs. In addition, the Federal Government has recently seen fit to cut its contributions to post-secondary education in Manitoba by close to $5 million. This is a significant amount.

Mem bers are aware of the Federal Government's proposal for additional cutbacks in its support for Health and Post-Secondary Education - cutbacks which would come on top of last year's federal cutbacks which hit Manitoba hardest, on a per capita basis, than any other province. All provinces are concerned with the new cutbacks and have asked Ottawa not to pro ceed with them thereby providing an opportunity for program Ministers to conclude their discussions on program objectives and conditions and improvements - after which Finance Ministers should conclude agreement on financial aspects.

Currently Ottawa app ears to be con tinuin g discussions on program objectives and improvements in segregated discussions among program Ministers. It is especially disappointing to have the Federal Finance Minister at the same time prepare further cutbacks in Ottawa's contribution. We recognize the importance of sustained federal support as a financial foundation for qu ality programming and feel Ottawa's proposals threaten those financial underpinnings.

In spite of these difficulties, the Government of Manitoba has maintained its commitment to developing the human resources through the education system of this province. We have provided generous support to schools through our levels of funding, allowing schools to maintain their programs. We have maintained the Education Support Program within its legislative mandate which provides for an automa tic increase based on the change in the Consumer Price Index, which is 10 .4 percent.

This, combined with a .8 percent decrease in the eligible enrolment of school divisions, provided an increase of $37.6 million or 8 percent in the program. The direct government contribution to education in Manitoba in 19 83 will increase by $30.9 million or 9.2 percent. The $30.9 million increase includes an increase of $25.9 million in the government's direct contribution to the Education Support Program and an increase of $5.0 million in other grants. In providing sufficient direct funding, the government had three goals:

A) Maintenance of programs and staffing levels. 8) Relief of the tax burden on local property taxpayers by paying a larger percentage of school costs from provincial revenues.

C) To respond to inequ ities created by the Educ ation Sup port Program (ESP) in divisions with low assess ment and low per pupil expenditures when the program was introduced, we provided an additional $1 2.4 million in suppl ementa l gr ants in 19 82. Because these problems continue to exist and are gett ing worse, we are increasing the supplemental grant to $16 .9 million this year. And, as we did last year, we will provide a special $2 million grant to Winnipeg School Division No. 1, to help that division respond to the needs of the large number of "at risk" children in the core area of the city.

Without the supp lemental gr ant, local property taxpayers would have experienced an average 5.2 mill increase in their local property taxes this year. I further wish to emp hasize, Mr. Chairman, the net school tax increase across the province this year will average 5.8 percent - a magic figure in some people's eyes - as a result of funding from the government. The overall percentage of costs of education borne by the province has been maintained at 54 this achievement, Mr. burdens placed on this government by a very economic situation.

The Education Support Levy of property owners increased by 2.5 mills on assessment - an increase of 6 percent. Last year, the rise was 4.2 mills. Many divisions, however, had their mill increase for Support Levy offset or more than offset, completely offset, by the additional supplemental grants. Thirty divisions had their mill increase offset last year. This year, 44 divisions will have their support levy offset The mill rate relief achieved through this supplemental program goes as high as 18 .9 mills in Turtle River School Division and 24. 7 mills in the School District of Lynn Lake.

We have successfu lly redistributed funds to divisions and areas of the province where there is the greatest 1991

Thursday, 21 April, 1983 need, whether that need is the result of inequities of the ES P or because of problems caused by declining enrolment or lack of local property-based revenue. For Children with Special Needs, we were able to add $5. 1 million for programs in this important area. This aids school divisions to help the increasing number of children with special needs, including those with social and economic disadvantages. Once again this government has recognized the wisdom of providing help to the smallest schools in the province.

We have been able to increase grants slightly to $1 .76 million and have made it possible for schools to use the grants entirely for human resources if they choose to do so. In addition, we are supporting a number of pilot projects in rural and remote areas of the province, which we hope will provide innovations in the delivery of programs which could be used by other schools throughout the province. Our Small School's Program has been one of the best received programs, Mr. Chairman, and confirms our commitment to providing equality of opportunity to all residents of Manitoba.

I am confident the level of support and the amount of support we have provided school divisions this year will offer equality of educational opportunity without adding a heavy burden to the local property taxpayers. Contrary to the approach taken in other ju risdictions, where the tendency is to reduce support in these difficult economic times, our approach has been to recognize the importance of maintaining our commitment to education.

We have done so for two very important reasons: If we don't pay now to train our children to become productive contributors to society, we will pay later in higher social costs; and our children require good education in bad economic times as well as times of affluence. This past year, I've undertaken a major reorganization of my department which will be reflected in my Estima tes. The purpose for this organization was fourfold: 1. Greater equity in provision of resou rces and services. 2. Integrated service del ivery, tied to non education services 3.

Co-operative syste m: local autonomy - including wide public participation - balanced by support in leadership from the department. 4. Responding to the rapidly changing needs in the education system. Manda tes have been changed for several branches. First of all, the Native Education

section has been raised to branch status and its manda te has been broadened to respond more adequately to the needs of Native students. The Planning and Research Branch will now provide an improved information and planning capacity to the department. The Child Care and Development Branch will now be dea ling with the whole range of Special Needs, with a particular empha sis on preventativ e programs and those that involve parents, teachers, and the community jointly in meeting the needs of exce ptional children.

The Curri culum Development and Impl ementation Branch will be emphasizing the implementation of curricula. Regional Services Branch is a new branch which will provide sup port services to schools and school divisions; assist them in dealing with critical issues: such as, computer education, dec lining enrolment, special needs of remote communities and small schools. This branch will be using the expertise and knowledge of the people working in the field in these areas. Mr. Chairman, pressures have not eased in the past year for either teachers in the classroom or for the education system as a whole.

Schools have been confronted with changing needs of students as families face increased financial stress. Schools must deal with the effects of de clining enr olm ent and changing enrolment patterns. In response we have taken a leadership role in providing school divisions with school closure guidelines. Schools do not function in isolation. They add directly to the quality of life of their commu nities. For that reason the decision to close a school cannot be made in isolation from communit y.

The gu idelines give recog nition to the fact that school divisions have authority over school closure, but give school boards procedures to follow before making a decision to close a school. This includes consultation with parents and area residents and a full year for ir.iplernentation of the dec ision. This last point helps to minimize disruptions within the commun ity. Also reflecting changing times and changing needs of our school system are the changes we have made in considering Capital out of reve nue projects. The days are past when empha sis is on building new schools in an expanding school syste m.

Today we must respond to the need to recondition and upgr ade exis ting facilities. In devel oping a new system for considering major building and renovation needs of divisions, we realize that information should be gather ed on the existing education facilities and that this information should be computerized and maintained. With this information we can be more confident that the communities and the students with the greatest need for new facilities will receive the hig hest priority. Again, Mr. Chairman, our purpose is to ensure equality of educational opportunity.

Our new policy regard ing major projects recognizes the ability of school divisions to dete rmine their own needs. They can now decide when and how to proceed with many minor building renovation and maintenance projects without going through a lengthy process of prior public schools finance board approval. During the last nine months, Dr. Glenn Nicholls, Assistant Deputy Minister for Adminis trat ion and Finance Division has been conducting a major review of educational finance. I am expec ting Dr. Nicholls' report in Ju ne. Bu t Mr . Chairman, wha tever reco mm enda tions Dr.

Nicholls brings forward for consideration, the people of Manitoba can feel that they have had an opportunity to make their views known. Through a series of public meetings over 15 0 briefs were presented to the review. In fact, additional hearings were called because of the level of interest. The briefs did not stick to simple questions of how to raise money for education and how to distribute those funds.

Instead - and this is something which we encourage - the public presented views on 14 major topic areas, on every thing from transportation-related issues to issues involving the social and economic disadvantages found in some commun ities of our province. 1992 Quite apart from the public hearings on Education Finance, I have ·had the opportunity to visit schools

Thursday, 21 April, 19 83 throughout the province in some 27 school divisions. Again, Mr. Chairman, I've been delighted by the interest shown by parents and even people who don't have children in the school system, in issues with which all members of the education community are trying to come to grips. We want to encou rage and sti mula te dialogue between educators, trustees, parents and the public as a whole. To this end, we are sponsoring three seminars; two on public involvement and one for the those mem bers of the public who are interested in the subject of the teaching of heritage languages.

Our most recent seminar was last week in Brandon where over 200 trus tees, teachers, and parents gathered to discuss ways to increase public involvement in the school system. Community colleges. This past year Manitoba's three community colleges attracted 33,000 full and part-time students. The demand for training is strong throughout the province. It is particularly strong in those areas where demands for highly skilled workers are greatest. I refer to high technology and comput er-related occupations.

We have, therefore, been making efforts to devote our resources into keeping pace with the changing technol ogy. This year we will be adding five new course areas to the community college programs, all of which provide full cost recovery from the Federal Gover nment. So we are increasing our support to the commun ity colleges by 14 .9 percent this year. Universities. Manitoba's three universities and St. Boniface College will be receivi ng a 10. 7 percent increase in funding, inclusive of funds to offset the 1. 5 percent Special Levy for Health and Education.

When this increase is added to the 15 .7 percent increase which the universities received last year, it is not difficult to see th at even in tough eco nomic times the government has maintained its commitment to support high level education. In addition, we have maintained what was a 66 percent increase in funding for up grading and renovating buildings last year - a $5 million sum - this year. This, despite an approximate $5 million cutback in support for post-secondary education from the Federal Gove rnment. Mr.

Chairman, I want to empha size that, in spite of the federal cutbacks in post-seco ndary education funding, which affects Manitoba more severely than other provinces, our government is providing a level of support for this year that, to date, is unparalleled in any other province. The educa tion system continu es to be a major emp loyer, not just of teachers, but of custodians and bus drivers. It continues to be a major buyer of goods and services in our smaller, as well as, our larger communities. It continues to be a builder, not only of buildings, but of people as well. Mr.

Chairman, the estimates of my department reflect prudent use of resources to provide good quality educa tion and the broa dest possible access to education while at the same time contributing to the full economic recovery of our province. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Tuxedo. MR. G. FILMON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I welcome the opportunity to respond to the Minister's opening remarks and to commence the debate on the estima tes for the Department of Education for this year. There are many things that we, in opposition, would like to discuss with the Minister, would like to have her opinions and views on.

There are many areas of information that we would like to have on the table so that we could more fully evaluate the programs and the thrusts of her department in various areas. We appreciate the remarks that she has made with respect to the commitment of this government towards educa tion. All of us on this side of the House, and indeed I am sure all Manitobans, view education as a very important aspect of provincial go ver nment activities and indeed we were pleased to hear the Minister's commitment to maintaining a high quality of education in Manitoba.

I'm sure we would all appreciate it more if that commitment were backed up by firm action and I think that, as the information on the Estimates unfolds, we will perhaps have an opportunity to see that the action doesn't necessarily support the verbal commitment which the Minister has given, both today and on many occasions, and perhaps we'll have an opportunity to discuss whether or not the perception that I have and that my colleagues have is a valid one, but certainly I feel that in many cases, the Minister has overstated just how well she and her government are maintaining their commitment to education in this province.

As we view the Estima tes that the Minister is putting before us, I think that they have to be viewed against the backdrop of a num ber of issues of concern, the continued and added dependence on the property tax as a prime source of funds for education in this province, when her leader, the now Premier of this province, promis ed to ease the prop erty tax bu rden on Manitobans, and we have seen last year, on average, mo re than 10 mills adde d to prop erty tax rolls throughout the province for education purposes.

Part of it, 4.5 mills, as I recall, 4.2 mills was as a result of the Provincial Gover nment's imposition on the Education Support Levy. Although the imposition this year was a little less, still 2.5 mills is significant, and when added to the requirements in terms of special levies throughout the province, I think we'll find that it will be again close to the order of 10 mills across the board throughout the province on all property taxes for additional support to education.

I think that's a disturbing prospect, disturbing both from the viewpoint of, as I say, the added dependence or the continuing dependence on the pr,... perty tax rolls to support education in the province, and of concern when it is compared to the promises which the Minister's leader and party made in running for election in 1981, the promise that it would ease the property tax burden, and indeed it has not. - (I nterject ion) - My colleague says that in some cases various members of that government had indicated that they would remove the prop erty tax bur den with respect to educa tion.

Obviously, there is much to be achieved and this Minister, who holds great potential, also holds a great burden in having to live up to the promises that her party made in running for election in the last election in 198 1. As well, among the areas of discussion that will evoke concern and questions on our

part is the very maternal approach that this government and this Minister - I do 1993

Thursday, 21 April, 1983 not say that in a sexist term, I could easily use paternal approach - is using with respect to the issuing of special grants. There are instances, I'm sure, where given a rational set of criteria, one could justify giving special grants to various divisions for various purposes. But I think the Min ist er, in only her sec ond year, is demons trating very clearly that the special grants approach is one which she and her government favour, because they have the direct opportunity to gain political credit for giving additional funds to divisions.

The purposes for which they give the special grants may well be justifiable, but the difficult is that all divisions do not approach them on an equal footing. They are not equally av ailable to all divisions and the opportunities to qualify aren't always stated ahead of time. In fact, what happens is that the Minister chooses because of political, I suppose, reasons to simply jump in and throw a special grant at a particular division for a particular purpose that isn't necessarily visible ahead of time.

By the time the grant has been given, other divisions have not had an opportunity perhaps to lay their case out and have not had an opportunity at that sort of grant. It's a situation which the Minister sort of runs to put her finger in the dike to stop a bit of leakage as it appears and doesn't come forward with a calm, rational, broadly-based approach to funding, but rather throws money at a particular problem for a particular purpose which isn't always visible to the general public.

That kind of maternal or paternal approach in utilizing special grants as opposed to a broadly-based, well considered, province-wide program of support, to me, takes away eventually from the autonomy and the decision-making capabilities of individual locally-elected governments. I think here, in particular, of school boards and of course mun icipal governments who must rely on ministerial fiat to get some additional funding from time to time. There are always, no doubt, strings attached.

I suppose, in some cases, one could argue that this year, because we are facing municipal and school board elections this coming fall, that particular divisions that have a majority representat ion of New Democratic school board members, come in for a little greater consideration, because they obviously have to come up for re-elect ion this fall. It's in this government's interest to support those people and make them look favourably to their electorate as they come forward for election this fall. One could argue th at.

I'm not necessarily stating the case at this point for it, but there cer tainly doesn 't appear to have been any other jus tification for some of the special grants that have been thrown out by the Minister for these. I say that she leaves herself open to this kind of suspicion, which may in no way be valid, when she comes forward with these special grants without any overall program that could be used to jus tify them. We're concerned about the organi zation of the department.

The Minister has spoken in complimentary terms about her government's efforts to reorganize the Department of Education for purposes of efficiency, for purposes of efficiency, for purposes of more effectively carrying out their mandate in government. But at the same time, I guess, we have to question just how effective that reorganization can be. In looking at the organizational chart contained in the Annual Report of the Department of Education, I notice that there are six separate branches that report directly to the Deputy Minister and ultimately through the Deputy Minister to the Minister.

It seems to me that kind of clogging up, that kind of bottlenecking of reporting rela tionships, is not a good situation to be in. I question whether the reorganization, in putting more people in direct relationship to the Deputy Minister and Minister, isn't ultimately leading to the situation where too much comes together at one point, and therefore it's not possible for rational, calm and well considered decisions to be made because there's too much pressure on one particular point in the department, and that particular point, being so close to the top, that ultimately things get backlogged.

There was a question in the House earlier by my colleague for Emerson as to why the Minister hadn't responded to a letter from a constituent of his for over two months. The Minister replied saying that she received over 100 contacts a day, and it wasn't possible to respond to all of them and these things happen. It seems to me that when you set up an organizational structure that places six branches separately reporting to the Deputy Minister and Minister that you're asking for this kind of bottleneck and this kind of difficulty in relationship.

Surely, the Minister can set the department up in a way that she has confidence in some people to carry out her wishes, carry out her policies, go forward and do the administrative tasks without them all having to come directly through to hers or her Deputy's office. Ma ybe that's a problem. Ma ybe the goals, the philosophies and the policies of this Minister and this government with respect to education are not well enough defined so that others can carry out the work of the department.

Maybe the decision-making, the goals and the policies are so ill-defined that they amount to basically political moves that have to be made from time to time in order to satisfy the public out there who are concerned about education. I think that those are areas that this Minister is going to have to satisfy my colleagues and I more as we go through the Esti mates. I am concerne d tha t th is kind of disorgan ization, the Minister has said th at the department is better organized, more efficient, more effective; I say that it isn't well enough organized.

I think that this kind of disorganization can and does and is leading to low morale. I say that many of the moves that have taken place without some general policy direction being evident to senior staff in the department have led to low morale, have lead to a concern on the part of senior civil servants who see long-time civil servants being replaced, moved out of positions. I have some Orders in-Council here that identify the removal of senior civil servants from positions in the department to be reas signed. I think that kind of thing - and the reassignment isn't evident immediately.

I hope that the Minister has some answers on the reassignm ents that are to be taking place. I think that kind of thing leads to an overall lack of morale and a concern on the part of senior civil servants who are looking over their shoulder and saying, am I the next one to be moved over, am I the next one to be replaced, what's happening now? I think that kind of thing that happens when the Minister moves in quickly, calls a meeting within 24 hours of senior staff members and says, we've got a 19 94

whole new ball game here and this is the new thought and all of you are on hold and that kind of thing, although from a public relations standpoint, calling together the staff and giving them a lecture about what's happening may be good from the Minister's viewpoint, I think it is devastating to morale in the senior staff in the department. I am concerned that sort of thing has happened during the past year and will continue to happen unless the Minister comes up with some pretty readily understandable policy directions for her department in the next year.

I am thinking in terms of the fact that as I reviewed the Estimates debate for last year, I asked specifically about certain areas of the department and whether or not the Minister was satisfied that they were doing their job, that they were doing a good job, and whether or not she had any major plans to change. The Minister was evasive, but seemed to indicate that there weren't any drastic plans for change in the department.

Within four months of that statement, she announced some major reorganizations in the department and cut adrift a considerable number of senior civil servants as a result. 1 am concerned and my colleagues are as well, Mr. Chairman, about the change in policy and direction that the Minister has taken with respect to the freeze on university tuitions. Last year we questioned the Minister as to the rationale.

We questioned her as to whether or not the amount of money that was involved in the freeze might better be used in student aid support and whether or not she had any indications that would say that all people of all economic circumstances found the burden of university tuition to be too high. She didn't have any of that. No studies had been done at that time with respect to whether or not the money might better be spent on student aid or on a tuition freeze. lt appeared to be a very directly political decision. Well, this year we have a political about-face on that.

We now have a situation where the universities are permitted to increase their tuition. I am wondering what has changed in the past year other than perhaps a decision within Cabinet.

I am concerned about the fact that when in opposition, the New Democratic Party spoke out loudly about what they perceived to be a tightening up of procedures, some auditing that was taking place within the student aid branch, to ensure that those who needed the suppott got the support and to ensure that no money was being squandered by people who were not eligible or not entitled to receiving student aid, to ensure that we made maximum use of taxpayers' dollars to support people who absolutely needed it for support in attending universities and post-secondary institutions, all of those reasons.

And I find that this Minister has come forward with precisely the same approach this year even though her colleagues, when in opposition, screamed loudly and longly that this was harassment, that by doing this we would be cutting out people and they're doing virtually the same thing with respect to auditing and checking and making sure that people are committing resources from their families towards their housing costs in going to post-secondary. All these kinds of things which this Minister says is a new deal and a new idea, were all things that her party in opposition criticized two years ago.

I am concerned as well with respect to various cuts overall in post-secondary education. Some of them are specific; some of them are general. Perhaps some of them have to do with redeployment of funds to the so called Jobs Fund, that ephemeral concept that's been sold by the Minister's colleagues in the House and we'll obviously want to know more about it, but at the moment they appear to be removals of funding in certain areas from the Minister's budget.

Hopefully they show up elsewhere under the Jobs Fund and hopefully they will continue to provide the same kinds of things that they were in the past when they weren't in the Jobs Fund but will support education in this province. The Minister has made various comments in her opening remarks about the support of the government and the commitment of the government to certain things.

The commitment to not building new schools when there are other existing schools that can be used and renovated and renewed and used for other purposes is one that certainly makes some sense, it has some logic attached to it. it is certainly is something that we on this side wouldn't propose to criticize, but at the same time we don't always see the Minister carrying through with that commitment. it seems as though , for whatever purposes, the Minister has that as a general policy, but that general policy can be overidden for political considerations from time to time.

We would like to discuss some of those situations with the Minister from time to time during the Estimates review. The other area that is of concern to us Is the overall statement that Is made by the Minister and I quote. She says that "the government of Manitoba has maintained its commitment to developing the human resources through the education system of this province.

We have provided generous support to schools through our levels of funding, allowing schools to maintain their programs." Well, generous support of course, beauty is in the eye of the beholder and the definition of generous support, I am sure would vary depending on who is receiving that support. Just in overall terms, if one has to assume that this government, like any government, has its own priorities, and its own system of priorities.

I wonder how the Minister can accept the fact that the overall increase in spending by the government in this fiscal year is projected to be over 19 percent, and her department, which is presumably a high priority and has the commitment to develop human resources through education, gets an increase of 8.71 percent compared to the Provincial Government average of over 19 percent. That doesn't sound like a priority to me, but then agai'l, I don't know what the definition of priority is in the mind of this Minister or this NDP Government and, certainly, I'll be anxious to hear the explanation of that anomaly.

The Minister talks in terms of various aspects of the programs and the work that she is doing and, among others, we have the special grants which are increasing. We'll talk about those special grants; we'll talk about the special-special grants that are coming through, as I said before. The comparisons that are being made are not always, in my view anyway , the same comparisons that people out in the community would make.

The fact that 44 divisions will have their support levy, that is the extra 2.5 mills that were added by the government this year offset by the special grants that the Minister is giving, isn't the only important thing because, of course, as the Minister well knows, there 1995

Thursday, 21 April, 1983 is the increases in special levies that will occur and, as I said , I think that once again we're going to be in the range of 10 mills increase across the board throughout the province as a result of what I would term to be an under-funding. We're still at the level where the fresh addition of provincial money this year is, and I have it in the Minister's statement, something in the range of $31 million. That compares to the fresh increase of provincial money two years ago, the last year that we were in government, of between $70 million and $80 million.

Although the Minister says that her support is "generous," it doesn't meet the test of the needs of the school divisions out there and, therefore, all of them are having to face their property taxpa yers with rather large increases in requests for property taxes this year. The Mi nister has indicated that one of the major thrusts of her department during the past year has been to come forward with a set of guidelines to be follo wed for school closures, and I'm pleased to see that.

Obviously , that was the thrus t of the private members' resolution which our side brought forward last year and urged the Minister to have that kind of thing. I'd say that those guidelines are useful and I'm glad that the Minister is taking the interest in the problem that occurs in communities as a result of school closures. I would hope that the Minister having placed the guidelines in front of the school divisions, will now allow the local authorities to make their best judgment based on those guidelines.

As I say, there has been a disturbing tendency during the past year by the Minister to get involved in the actual decision making to, in effect, overrule some of the best judgments and wishes of local school divisions, not necessarily by order, but by comment that's made to the divisions after some appeals, perhaps, to her office. The Mi nister has indicated that she's had the opportu nity to visit throughout the province In some 27 school divisions.

The only comment that I have to make on that is that I recall the Mi nister sending out the news release indicating that she was going to do this and it was a major thrust and, certainly, I'm sure that all people throughout the province like to feel that they have access to their government and to the Minister responsible for various areas in which they have a concern or a problem.

The difficulty is that I was contacted on a number of occasions by people who said we are out in this partic ular division, there was an annou ncement; in fact, it was carried in the paper that the Minister would be out to visit our division and to meet with interested parties, and we attempted to see the Minister and were refused access to the Minister. Yes, 1 guess 1 would have to admit that in each

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	32-2-51b
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	32nd 2nd hansardpdf 51b.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	79a1010c38a94f279530be3c2d69420f24e59204

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (pdf).